HBS v DAO twin dilemma

Also these two schools are not right next two each other so commute becomes a question too and where you currently live (does it happen to be right in the middle). It really is a whole family decision as to what is best for all, in the circumstances.

OP why can the schools tell you that Twin 1 will definitely get a place and not tell you if Twin 2 will still get a sibling place at DAO?
And if Twin 2 does not qualify for a sibling place at DA) anymore, then what was her second choice on the CAF and will she still get that now as a late applicant? I am really confused. Because if Twin 2 would still be in the same position she would otherwise have been in and her second choice is a good school too, then this is less of an issue and more of a question of whether you want to separate them or not.

Gosh, that is a real dilemma isn't it? Is there any scope at all to arrange for dd1 to go and visit the school again? If 60 students get in on academic ability, presumably they do a grammar stream?

If they were siblings and twin 2 was a year younger... Would you insist on twin 1 going to dao? And if twin 2 was the older sibling... What would you have done? The answers to these questions will help you decide if you are prioritising the needs of one over the other. For clarity the answers should stay the same whichever order it is, then it would be an independent decision

When did this preference for HBS arise/how strong is it? Is there any chance it is linked to the fact that her twin wouldn’t be going there?

Where will twin 2 go if not DAO?

I think I’d be leaning towards sending them both to DAO in this situation, because it’s an excellent school so a good choice for both, even if it’s not twin 1’s first choice right now.

So you could say in a way that twin 1 benefitted from the family resource and therefore she could perhaps choose her second preference (which is still amazing), to benefit the family

I'm agog at this.

It seems really important to you that twin 2 gets what she wants rather than twin 1 gets what she earned,

Twin 2 should have sat the tests and earned her own place.

I have 4 sets of friends with twins who have all had similar issues. Once you put a twin into a selective system, either 1 or both of them, you have to make these kinds of choices.
In the examples I know of, twin 1 would have gotten a score high enough for a superselective and twin 2 not and a less selective grammar etc. In every case, the parent has had to decide whether to play it safe and keep them together or separate them.
Twins travelling together to school etc is always a concern for parents especially if it is their eldest children they are sending off.
I am really not convinced that HBS is going to be a better fit for a highly academic shy child than DAO. I have seen children with that profile sink in a superselective school where they will not easily be at the top - usually it is the confident resilient ones that cope best in that environment who are also really bright. It seems you and Twin 1 have convinced yourselves that HBS is the better fit, but you do not actually know yet whether she even has a score high enough on 4 March to get in on the waiting list? Or did they actually tell you this? Normally, they would not at this point in the admissions process. So a lot of your fretting may be normal secondary school sending them off niggles and worries.

I think you're missing the forest for the trees. Allowing twin A to work so hard to get into her dream school and then telling her she can't go and instead has to go to a school she doesn't want to attend because she has to help her sister get into her first choice school (after the sister chose not to even sit the 11+) is far more likely to cause serious, long-lasting harm to DD1 and the family relationships that outweighs any objective comparisons about school quality

I think objective decision making is the forest, thinking this will certainly cause long-lasting harm is more like the tree.

It depends on the school, but yes some partially-selectives (including Dame Alice Owens) are like that. Partially-selective schools are sort of in-betweens of comprehensives and grammars, so they fill some places based on specific aptitudes (academic, music, etc) and some based on the same sorts of criteria comprehensives use (looked after children, residence proximity, sibling at the school). For DAO siblings of current students (or twins/triplets of current year applicants who gain a place by another criteria like with OP's DD2) are actually prioritized before any applicants hoping for places based on academic ability.

HBS is a grammar, so all admissions is based on how applicants score on their admission exams.

I was the equivalent of twin 1, although I relating to my younger sibling. My parents deliberately chose a school for me because they thought that my sister wouldn't get into the selective school (no sibling policy).

Although there wasn't immediate fallout, the relationship between my sister and I was damaged long term. Obviously a lot more history here, but I was never allowed to fulfill my potential, was taught that my views and feelings were not as important as my sister's and I have no relationship with my sister now, who despises me.

As a train, I find it shocking that you are considering using twin A to get a place for tein B.

Imagine they were friends... Then twin A cab go to the school that she worked so hard for and really wants... HBS. Twin B will get the school that she didn't work hard for and not using her sister's hard work to get in ie whatevet school this us. I can only see the sacrifice of twin A if both go to DAO. But there is no sacrifice for twin B if they go to different schools... She is going to the one that she worked for. If you send them both to DAO there will be a lot and a lot of resentment. Everything in their life will be blamed on this decision and you/her sister.

Twin B cannot blame twin A fit not getting in to DAO as she would not have gotten in on her own merits.

It seems ridiculous that you can get a sibling place without taking the 11+. So if you have a 10/11 year old that passes tge 11+ then subsequent siblings get into the school without having to do so?

Henrietta Barnet School
Dame Alice Owens School
Common Application Form

@twindilemma82 what do your abbreviations mean??? hbs?? dao?? caf????

Twin B risked her options. Twin B chose not to take the exam and is thus, the one responsible for any limitation in options. I really don't understand equivalating the two scenarios.

Twin A worked hard and took the test allowing her to go to HBS. Not allowing her to go to the school of her choice harms her in a way that wouldn't have happened had she not had a twin who didn't bother to take the test.

Twin B chose not to take the test. Either she isn't fussed about going to DAO or she just figured that she could ride in on her sister's coattails. Either way, she is responsible for any lack of options - her sister living her own life merely removes any extra bonus that twin B was hoping to take advantage of (it hasn't taken away anything that twin B has earned).

I haven't a clue what DAO is and am hazarding a guess at HBS but I get the gist of your post.

Forty years ago I took the 11plus and was offered a place at a super selective grammar school. My parents knew that my younger sister wouldn't get a place and therefore sent me to a private school with a sibling policy so that my sister would get in

It was a great decision for my sister but, even now, I feel like my education was sacrificed for my sister.

I would try to rectify this if you can

Please send each child to the school that best suits them.

I never understood why I had to do somethings because my brother wanted to do it. I'm rapidly heading towards 60 and it still rankles.

I suggest that the OP consider realistically how much harm not being in the smaller, single-sex school might cause twin A

I think you're missing the forest for the trees. Allowing twin A to work so hard to get into her dream school and then telling her she can't go and instead has to go to a school she doesn't want to attend because she has to help her sister get into her first choice school (after the sister chose not to even sit the 11+) is far more likely to cause serious, long-lasting harm to DD1 and the family relationships that outweighs any objective comparisons about school quality. And a student who is deeply angry and unhappy about being sent to a school will almost never do as well there as they could at an equal school where they're happy to be. The harm at stake isn't sending a child to DAO rather than HBS. Refusing to let DD1 take up the place she earned at a school OP agrees will be a better fit for her tells her that the work she put in was pointless and that she's expected to sacrifice her dream for her sister. DD1 would be right to not forgive that.

personally maintaining and improving psychological health for twin 1 would be my primary concern. if she is currently fragile and wants the smaller school I would aim in that direction.
but maybe the reality is neither school is the right fit.

to me it sounds like twin 1 pushes herself not out of the joy of accomplishment but due to friendship issues and the fear of perceived failure.
so my vote would be two different schools due to two different personality types or a totally different option.

Twin 1 learns the hard way that doing an extra effort is not worth anything if she is denied the desired school for which she has qualified at 11+ exams only to secure twin 2 who has made no effort for the desired school place.

Read from above all I suggest that the OP consider realistically how much harm not being in the smaller, single-sex school might cause twin A(while also acknowledging that this might mean fewer provisions in some areas in terms of suitability). And think the same for twin B. The academic selectivity factor between these two schools should be the least to be concerned.

It's important to weigh these factors against other uncertain outcomes. And the sibling policy offers a unique option for decision making that other family with individual child can't have.